EVE Search - How to Represent the Player Base Without Killing the CSM

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

How to Represent the Player Base Without Killing the CSM

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 491	Posted - 2011.10.26 17:26:00 - [31] - Quote Parsec Seti wrote: If you only want the game played your way, and want to force others to play it the way you want, then being the chair of a group that filters out players concerns and presents the "most important" ones to CPP would help you push your agenda. So you are basing all these lame arguments on the assumption that The Mittani wants everybody to play the game exactly the same way he does? I hope I'm wrong because that's pretty stupid.
Parsec Seti 1st Contact Fade 2 Black 20	Posted - 2011.10.26 18:42:00 - [32] - Quote Skunk Gracklaw wrote: Parsec Seti wrote: If you only want the game played your way, and want to force others to play it the way you want, then being the chair of a group that filters out players concerns and presents the "most important" ones to CPP would help you push your agenda. So you are basing all these lame arguments on the assumption that The Mittani wants everybody to play the game exactly the same way he does? I hope I'm wrong because that's pretty stupid. Are you a Mittani alt? or just a lackey that falls in line when you're told... The CSM is subjective, and pushes the game towards the way they want it. We need an objective measure of what the players want, not subjective players who get to choose what issues get presented to CCP.
Nariya Kentaya Celestial Ascension 43	Posted - 2011.10.26 19:35:00 - [33] - Quote Elise DarkStar wrote: I don't see how polling is going to be harmful, unless you automatically assume that it will be used improperly. It's a tool like anything else. the whole point is that "polling" can be used to skew results in your favor even more. for example, i take a pole to see what the most favorite color of all time is, i have 4 choices red green blue yellow your favorite color is purple, but you can't pick that, in fact, if you vote at all it will be for one of the 4 colors I thought was improtant enough to list, results would eb EVEN more skewed if i confused some players by not using standard names, such as Emerald, Azure, Gold, and Crimson (believe it or not, alot of people dont know what the common emerald looks like) basically, what topics you choose and how you phrase them can horribly skew the results in favor of one thing or another, its a common political tactic.
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 502	Posted - 2011.10.26 19:35:00 - [34] - Quote Parsec Seti wrote: The CSM is subjective, and pushes the game towards the way they want it. Provide one example.
Elise DarkStar DarkCorp Capital Group DarkCorp Imperium 103	Posted - 2011.10.26 19:54:00 - [35] - Quote Parsec Seti wrote: We need an objective measure of what the players want, not subjective players who get to choose what issues get presented to CCP. Hahaha again with this "objective" and "polling" bullshit. Polling is no more or less objective than representation. You can argue which one is a better system in this particular instance, but neither is unequivocally a superior method of collective action. I'd love to know where this idea that surveys are some kind of science came from. It is a dangerous misconception.
Elise DarkStar DarkCorp Capital Group DarkCorp Imperium 103	Posted - 2011.10.26 19:57:00 - [36] - Quote Nariya Kentaya wrote: the whole point is that "polling" can be used to skew results in your favor even more. Absolutely. So if your argument is that CCP can't be trusted to create an effective and representative polling system, then fine, but state that unequivocally. However, there is nothing inherently dysfunctional with polling or anything that makes it a universally poorer system than representation.
Two step Aperture Harmonics K162 354	Posted - 2011.10.26 20:23:00 - [37] - Quote I disagree with the chairman of the CSM on crowdsourcing, and the OP needs to realize that the crowdsourcing was done entirely by Trebor. CCP did publicize it, but he did all the work. The value of the crowdsourcing is as more data on what issues are annoying players currently, but there are a large number of things that aren't on the crowdsourcing list that are still important. When CCP goes into crazy, "lets fix everything" mode like they are now, looking at the crowdsourcing results is an important clue as to where they can get the most bang for their buck. CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog What does CSM 6 do?
Elise DarkStar DarkCorp Capital Group DarkCorp Imperium 106	Posted - 2011.10.26 20:33:00 - [38] - Quote Two step wrote: When CCP goes into crazy, "lets fix everything" mode like they are now, looking at the crowdsourcing results is an important clue as to where they can get the most bang for their buck. I absolutely agree. I can understand the hesitancy because of the potential for abuse, but I think it's worth the risk because of how enormously disparate the player experience is. The CSM is great for having representative players there talking to devs and providing valuable feedback, and also for condensing the most pressing and thematic concerns into something that devs can use, but I don't think the CSM needs to be a medium for all those tiny little details that players know best and devs know best how and in what order to address.
The Mittani GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1686	Posted - 2011.10.26 20:34:00 - [39] - Quote Threads like threads inspire me to ask: Do you guys like bitcoin and Ron Paul, too? The focus on 'objective' polls and an obsession with systems and rationality... Completely non-troll question. The concept of rationalism still holds a grip on much of American politics, so there's a lot of faith in 'objective polls' and such in some quarters.
Trebor Daehdoow Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 1028	Posted - 2011.10.26 23:30:00 - [40] - Quote Two step wrote: When CCP goes into crazy, "lets fix everything" mode like they are now, looking at the crowdsourcing results is an important clue as to where they can get the most bang for their buck. And that's exactly why I did it. CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism! CSM 6 Activities Summary \| My CSM blog
Ladie Harlot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 531	Posted - 2011.10.26 23:51:00 - [41] - Quote Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Two step wrote: When CCP goes into crazy, "lets fix everything" mode like they are now, looking at the crowdsourcing results is an important clue as to where they can get the most bang for their buck. And that's exactly why I did it. And do you believe docking games is the number one problem that Eve players have with the game? The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Endovior Brothers At Arms Intrepid Crossing 16	Posted - 2011.10.27 03:57:00 - [42] - Quote Yes, I read the original post... I just disagree. When a single member of the CSM decides to take a quick little poll, said poll should not be the basis of the activities of the rest of the CSM, and the CSM should not be judged by it's adherence to that poll's results. That is the entirety of my point. I'm not saying that you're totally wrong, or that more polls or better ways of polling would be somehow bad... just that they're far less important then you seem to think.
Trebor Daehdoow Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 1030	Posted - 2011.10.27 11:16:00 - [43] - Quote Ladie Harlot wrote: And do you believe docking games is the number one problem that Eve players have with the game? Sweetums, you not only know that the voting was affected by EVE Uni bloc-voting, but also that the results are available with the EVE Uni votes removed. Really, the lack of effort you put into your trolling is disheartening. But now that you mention it, the fact that bloc-voting can distort voting results is an issue. Perhaps something can be done in the next CSM elections to reduce its effect. Thanks for reminding me! CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism! CSM 6 Activities Summary \| My CSM blog
Zaokdi Menom Black Anvil Industries LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 0	Posted - 2011.10.29 10:09:00 - [44] - Quote The Mittani wrote: I think this will just have to be my stock reply for the now-daily idiotic threads from miners who mistakenly blame the CSM for their dead Mackinaws: Quote: As I relaxed in the aftermath of a time-dilated fight where supercaps didn't rule the day and lag didn't determine the outcome, I browsed a rack of podkills with implants, spun my recently rebalanced hybrid-gunned ship, and typed off a poorly-thought-out ragepost about how the CSM was irrelevant, because I'm literally a big babby who has no idea what he's talking about. I then went off to enjoy a bunch of new spaceship-related content that CCP produced after they finally acknowledged that focusing on FiS instead of WiS was the right thing to do! Wrong answer Mittani. It is interesting to see how a such short minded person like you happen to be so arrogant. Where does your confidence excess come from? Do you really think that you are the owner of the truth? Go get a post talking about Justin Beiber or something like it. Leave happy pilots alone. Loser.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 872	Posted - 2011.10.29 11:03:00 - [45] - Quote Ladie Harlot wrote: Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Two step wrote: When CCP goes into crazy, "lets fix everything" mode like they are now, looking at the crowdsourcing results is an important clue as to where they can get the most bang for their buck. And that's exactly why I did it. And do you believe docking games is the number one problem that Eve players have with the game? I think it's fair to say that even if it's not the most important issue, EVE would certainly be the better for fixing it. It's not something that takes a huge amount of code-dev resources to fix, either. It's a game-balance issue. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players. Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 872	Posted - 2011.10.29 11:04:00 - [46] - Quote Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Ladie Harlot wrote: And do you believe docking games is the number one problem that Eve players have with the game? Sweetums, you not only know that the voting was affected by EVE Uni bloc-voting, but also that the results are available with the EVE Uni votes removed. Really, the lack of effort you put into your trolling is disheartening. But now that you mention it, the fact that bloc-voting can distort voting results is an issue. Perhaps something can be done in the next CSM elections to reduce its effect. Thanks for reminding me! The best possible counter to bloc voting is for everybody to vote. The more people who vote, the less effect a bloc of finite size can sway results. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players. Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Ladie Harlot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 567	Posted - 2011.10.29 18:09:00 - [47] - Quote Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Ladie Harlot wrote: And do you believe docking games is the number one problem that Eve players have with the game? Sweetums, you not only know that the voting was affected by EVE Uni bloc-voting, but also that the results are available with the EVE Uni votes removed. Really, the lack of effort you put into your trolling is disheartening. Yet by removing the e-uni votes you're left with an even tinier fraction of the playerbase voting so those results are even more unreliable. Face it...your "crowdsourcing" idea failed. The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Ladie Harlot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 567	Posted - 2011.10.29 18:12:00 - [48] - Quote Malcanis wrote: I think it's fair to say that even if it's not the most important issue, EVE would certainly be the better for fixing it. It's not something that takes a huge amount of code-dev resources to fix, either. It's a game-balance issue. You are absolutely right. My point wasn't that docking games doesn't need to be fixed but that Trebor's "crowdsourcing" isn't a viable alternative to the CSM. The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Sylar McIntyr Konstrukteure der Zukunft The Initiative. 5	Posted - 2011.10.30 05:13:00 - [49] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: Andski wrote: Jehan Markow wrote: Please consider the idea. The CSM as it stands today is an irrelevant dinosaur with little connection to the majority of players. you clearly haven't been paying attention Actually, I have, and clearly you are trolling me. According to CCP's own figures, voter participation in the last CSM election was around 14%, up from 12% in the previous election. You can check that information on CCP's sites, TenTonHammer, and Massively, among others. Those figures mean that 86% percent of players are currently not connected to the CSM. I think my point stands. epic new forums killed my post :/
Ladie Harlot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 572	Posted - 2011.10.30 07:50:00 - [50] - Quote Sylar McIntyr wrote: Why are ttose 86% disconnected? Where they hindered from voting? Or did they just not care enough? I think after five CSMs where nothing of note was accomplished most players just checked out of the whole process. It wasn't until CSM6 actually started to make a difference that people woke up. The funniest thing is that everything this CSM has worked for will make the game better as a whole but because some people can't see beyond the fact that Mittens is a goon they won't admit it. In all of the anti-CSM/anti-Mittens threads I keep asking for just one example of how the current CSM has hurt the game and I haven't yet gotten an answer. The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Sylar McIntyr Konstrukteure der Zukunft The Initiative. 5	Posted - 2011.10.30 09:48:00 - [51] - Quote If so, the participation should rise next time, fair enough. But checking out and then complaining is outright stupid, because they had an equal opportunity and did not use it. And making changes to the CSM right now would be political suicide from CCP because everybody would see it as an attempt to neuter its influence. And as for the anti-Mittens crap: Deal wiz it! I don't like him either but he motivated his guys to get him elected. Want him gone? Hardly gonna happen, but the voiceless high sec dwellers could use the time to find a good representative for CSM you all can block vote on. Use the system because it lives from participation.
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 5	Posted - 2011.10.31 00:08:00 - [52] - Quote Endovior wrote: Yes, I read the original post... I just disagree. When a single member of the CSM decides to take a quick little poll, said poll should not be the basis of the activities of the rest of the CSM, and the CSM should not be judged by it's adherence to that poll's results. That is the entirety of my point. I'm not saying that you're totally wrong, or that more polls or better ways of polling would be somehow bad... just that they're far less important then you seem to think. It seems that yours and my words are orbiting around a central point of agreement, but we're on opposite sides of the same point everytime we exchange something. :) I do not think polling itself is the answer, but I do think that direct democracy is better than a representative system, for reasons I have outlined already in the thread. In this regard, more polling and better polling is the answer. I do not judge the CSM by their adherence to the results of the crowdsourcing poll. Instead I judge them on their ability to reach out and try to figure out what is best for everyone. This focus on ship rebalance is the perfect example. Sure hybrids suck right now. That's why I trained autocannons. But even after the rebalance, I'm still going to be fitting autocannons on my Myrmidons and Falcons. Once the rebalance happens, it will be fun to again roam with Thorax blobs, something that I've been missing in the atmosphere of 0.0 in recent years. But still, I don't think it's worth rebalancing. Mark my words: once we figure out this new balance, people will be complaining about how Amarrian ships need rebalancing and we'll be wasting more time on it. I just say, shut the ** up and enjoy the goddamn game. If you don't like the way a ship is balanced, nobody will force you to fly it. But obviously there are bigger issues out there that effect everyone. Just think about miners, who don't really fly any ships that need balancing. How about rebalancing mining barges? What CSM is working on that issue? Corporate roles/titles, for another instance, which ranked #2 and #3 in the crowdsourcing poll. Most importantly, what is the CSM doing to discourage overcrowding in hi-sec? How are they making 0.0, low-sec, and WH space more tempting? How about some level 4 missions that take players into WH space? But again, every CSM councillor is interested in his own pet projects. Malcanis wrote: The best possible counter to bloc voting is for everybody to vote. The more people who vote, the less effect a bloc of finite size can sway results. As I've been saying, that's the reason I am suggesting ongoing crowdsourcing. The primary problem with the summer poll is that it did not last long enough to collect a decent enough sample. Instead of thinking of votes in terms of deadlines, let's construct an ongoing system, that way it is as democratic as possible. Ladie Harlot wrote: Yet by removing the e-uni votes you're left with an even tinier fraction of the playerbase voting so those results are even more unreliable. Face it...your "crowdsourcing" idea failed. This is a pretty half-hearted argument. Crowdsourcing only failed for the problems I keep enumerating. It will succeed when we overcome those problems. Simple cause and effect, no opinions needed. Ladie Harlot wrote: I think after five CSMs where nothing of note was accomplished most players just checked out of the whole process. It wasn't until CSM6 actually started to make a difference that people woke up. The funniest thing is that everything this CSM has worked for will make the game better as a whole but because some people can't see beyond the fact that Mittens is a goon they won't admit it. In all of the anti-CSM/anti-Mittens threads I keep asking for just one example of how the current CSM has hurt the game and I haven't yet gotten an answer. This is not an anti-Mittani thread, in case you haven't been following. But the current CSM is no more effective at addressing all players and the game as a whole than previous ones. Just like previous Councils, CSM6 is again focused on its own pet issues to the detriment of the larger community. Because I'm fed up with it, I'm proposing something far more meaningful than representative democracy. Sylar McIntyr wrote:** If so, the participation should rise next time, fair enough. But checking out and then complaining is outright stupid, because they had an equal opportunity and did not use it. And making changes to the CSM right now would be political suicide from CCP because everybody would see it as an attempt to neuter its influence. Many people did not know what they were voting for or against. Others see representative democracy as irrelevant or corrupt. Still others have no problem with the game and saw no reason to vote. I really don't see too many problems with the game as a whole. Usually the only problems I see are the changes that the CSM keep trying to bring without everyone else in mind. And voting for CSM members is not going to change that. I voted half-heartedly with one of my accounts. And the guy I voted for has helped bring about more useless change. I just wish that some of the effort put into changing the game would be converted into efforts to learn what players want to see, instead of the false mentality of "we won the election so we'll do whatever we want." This is the caustic nature of representative democracy that we see in the faltering European Union and the United States today. I am sure EVE can be a better place. -JM
Ladie Harlot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 584	Posted - 2011.10.31 00:56:00 - [53] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: But the current CSM is no more effective at addressing all players and the game as a whole than previous ones. I've never seen so much whining and crying about the CSM as I have in the last month. They must be doing something right. The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Sephiroth CloneIIV Vitriol Ventures BLACK-MARK 7	Posted - 2011.10.31 23:08:00 - [54] - Quote The CSM in its current representation and ideas is not flawed, what is flawed is the ability of ccp to listen. What is the mouth of the players without ears to listen to them, or a mind to command a body to do action.
Jenshae Chiroptera 95	Posted - 2011.11.03 11:46:00 - [55] - Quote Docking games can be fun. We had a corp member playing them with some guys for eight hours. Meanwhile, he was playing on an alt. They didn't even get the kill in the end. Loads of fun to laugh at your enemies while they waste their time. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you.
Lord Zim Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 45	Posted - 2011.11.03 11:48:00 - [56] - Quote Ladie Harlot wrote: Jehan Markow wrote: But the current CSM is no more effective at addressing all players and the game as a whole than previous ones. I've never seen so much whining and crying about the CSM as I have in the last month. They must be doing something right. Maybe it isn't the CSM doing it right, maybe it's CCP doing the troll their playerbase thing right.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.